►
From YouTube: K8s SIG Docs Meeting 20190618
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
Alright,
hey
folks,
it's
Tuesday,
the
18th
of
June
2019,
and
this
is
the
weekly
meeting
for
cig
docs
for
kubernetes
and
back
I've
been
away
on
a
long
vacation.
Many
thanks
to
Jim
angel
for
running
meetings
and
minding
the
shop
while
folks
are
out
or
yeah
well
I'm
out
well,
Jennifer's
has
been
new
while
Jarrod's
been
out.
Oh
good,
hello,
Jim,
we're
just
saying
nice
things
about
you.
A
C
D
C
A
A
Let
me
spell
her
name
correctly
in
the
agenda.
There
we
go
and
when
I
was
looking
at
the
Wrangler
list
to
who
was
going
to
be
the
sixth
Wrangler
I
realized
that
we
were
like
at
the
end
of
the
the
Wrangler
scheduled
for
Q,
1
and
Q
2.
So
we've
got
to
generate
that
at
this
point.
I
have
generated
the
list
of
Wranglers
manually
and
I
will
say
frankly
that
I
hate
it.
So
if
there
is
a
chance
to
automate
that
or
make
it
better.
A
A
E
So
we
have
one
problem
at
the
moment
we
are
trying
to
to
fix
many
conflicts
that
we
have
for
115
115
branch
with
the
master.
We
tried
a
couple
couple
methods
and
then
we
said
I
think
so.
I
think
we,
if
one
will
the
good
credential,
could
just
make
that
branch
master
to
dare
15
directly
from
there
and
first
push
that.
Let
me
fine,
because
if
we
try
to
do
it
from
for
my
branch,
I
mean
for
my
fork:
it
doesn't
resolve
that
always
somebody
has
a
better
method
to
do
it.
E
A
Okay,
well,
hopefully,
we
get
Barney
back
for
context
right
now.
The
the
dev
1.15
release
branch
has
a
bunch
of
merge
conflicts
in
it
and
we
are
trying
to
resolve
those
and
get
those
get
that
branch
merge
able
to
master
I
haven't
have
hit.
The
limit
of
my
get
through
normally
I
would
ask
Misty
Linville,
but
I.
Don't
think
that
she's
available
so
Jim
did
the
awesome
thing
and
open
to
PR
to
test
infra
asking
them
for
help.
B
One
thing
I'll
add
to
that
as
well
is
I'm.
You
know,
I
can't
recall
when
I
was
doing
the
release,
if
I
was
working
out
of
the
k,
/
website
branch,
so
one
thing
we
might
consider
trying
is
to
with
the
with
Barney
now
being
part
of
the
owners
file
and
having
a
little
bit
more
permissions
to
be
able
to
do
certain
things.
B
I
don't
know
if
that
would
grant
him
the
right
to
be
able
to
just
clone
k
website
down,
fix
the
merge
conflicts
and
do
a
forced
push
for
the
dev
branch,
just
kind
of
hit
it
with
a
hammer.
You
know
I
know
we
have
some
other
issues
postponing
the
release,
so
we
have
a
little
bit
of
time,
but
but
it'd
be
nice
to
get
this
woman
behind
us.
B
E
B
You
know
all
that,
even
if
we
do
have
to
do
it,
this
way,
I
think
at
some
point,
sig
Docs
or
our
team
as
a
whole
needs
to
make
the
decision
if
we
want
to
adopt
a
new
model
that
allows
us
to
operate
out
of
a
local
branch
and
what
we're
doing
wrong
there.
That's
where
my
get
foo
can
have
reaches
limit
where
I
didn't
really
understand
what
is
needed
from
a
local
copy
to
resolve,
merge
conflicts
of
something
you
don't
own
your
upstream
branch
and
that
was
really
challenging
for
me.
B
So
Steve
could
net
his
net
stuff
has
been
great
helping
on
that
issue.
There
I
think
you
need
also
commented.
So
I
really
appreciate
that,
but
I
feel
like
I'm
a
very
novice
very
much
so
a
novice
when
it
comes
to
get
I'm
gonna
treasure
my
way
through.
But
what
was
saying
is
we
need
to
figure
out
if
we
want
to
hit
this
with
a
hammer
and
then
try
to
solve
this
long
term
or
if
we're
just
gonna
use
this
hammer
from
this
point
forward.
A
Would
definitely
say,
let's
hit
it
with
a
hammer
now,
and
then
we
can
have
like
a
longer
conversation
at
the
start
of
1.16
with
tested
for
about
how
how
to
resolve
or
how
to
keep
this
situation
from
happening
again.
You
know
it's.
When
I,
when
I
II
was
the
one
bout,
nine
leader
we
didn't,
we
didn't
have
the
same
problems
because
we
all
had
this
is
pre
prowl.
We
don't
have
write
access
to
the
branch
and
that
just
didn't
have
to
deal
trying
to
trying
to
wrangle
this
through
the
proxy
of
prowl
commands.
A
G
A
G
A
This
that
you
know
where
folks,
in
other
repositories,
cuts
to
where
master
is
the
the
development
branch
and
then
they
cut
like
cherry-pick
few
release
branch,
and
we
do
that.
The
opposite,
because
we
are
continuously
deploying
we
work
in
a
release,
branch
and
then
commit
to
master
like
merged
master
I.
Think
we
could
make
a
pretty
solid
argument.
That's
because
we
are
working
in
a
makeup
branch
like
that.
We're
not
we're.
Not
cherry-picking
individual
commits
we're
working
in
a
mega
branch
that
it
makes
sense
to
have
direct
write,
write
permissions.
G
I
was
definitely
yeah,
because
my
memory
from
from
back
then,
is
that
I
Andrew
Chen
did
it
for
one
release
and
I.
Think
I
followed
and
I
followed
his
lead
on.
You
know
on
a
day-to-day
way
of
just
keeping
on
top
of
this
and
I
think
it
had
something
to
do
with
doing
a
certain
kind
of
emerge
every
single
day
right
as
we
were
approaching,
and
it
there
were
a
few
hassles,
but
it
tended
to
work
pretty
well
and
it
avoided
the
big
problem
at
the
end.
G
So
I
would
think
if
we
could
make
a
case
for
going
back
to
doing
it.
That
way
and
then
consult
with
Andrew
I.
Think
he'd
have
a
firm,
pretty
firm
memory
of
how
we
we
did
it.
You
know
we
might
be
able
to
get
back
to
something
that
worked
a
little
better
I.
B
B
G
B
We
changed
the
model
from
that
after
having
a
little
bit
too
much
powers
with
the
the
get
model
that
that
I,
the
good
issue
I
ran
into-
and
this
is
the
first
release
that
we've
done
it
this
way
without
having
the
ability
to
force
push
that
dev
branch
would
alternately,
we
might
just
need
all
together
and
just
be
a
little
bit
more
responsible
with
it.
G
Yeah
at
this
point
you
know
you
know
more
about
it
than
I
do
because
I
haven't
thought
about
it
for
so
long,
but
you
know,
but
for
what?
For
whatever
that's
worth
I
remember
a
couple
of
cycles
where
we
did
that
thing
where
every
day
we
did
a.m.
emerge
and
then
the
and
that
seemed
to
keep
it
from
getting
you
know
growing
out
of
hand,
sure.
A
Part
of
part
of
why
this
is
so
hairy
right
now
is
because
we're
trying
to
merge
master
in
really
late
in
the
cycle
for
the
first
time.
So
it's
sort
of
hairy
by
virtue
of
being
late
in
the
cycle,
so
there's
gonna,
be
there's
gonna,
be
a
bit
of
yak
shaving
involved
in
fixing
these
emerge
gates,
but
yeah
Jim
I
mean
I,
know
that
your
experience
was
cautionary
in
some
ways,
but
I
don't
know
that.
A
A
A
G
G
C
A
A
A
A
A
H
A
H
G
A
B
What's
the
current
scope
of
this
I
see
it
here,
updating
existing
topics
you
created
new
time
I
put
about
so
I
think
I've
been
getting
started,
Kiba,
D,
I'm,
sure,
I,
don't
know
if
it's
worth
but
I
know
during
the
release
cycle
a
cig,
multi,
cluster
or
multi
cluster
lifecycle.
I
think
it
is
they're
actively
working
and
refining,
I,
think
neo,
lid
and
and
a
couple
other
folks
from
that
sig
regularly
review
and
update
those
cube,
ADM
Docs.
B
G
A
That's
cube,
ABM
is
sort
of
her
domain
yeah,
so
I,
don't
know
what
Jennifer's
availability
is,
like,
so
I
would
say,
let's
ping
her
and
invite
her
to
clarify
the
scope.
But
it's
not
like
the
the
next
work
here
is
to
to
scope
this
someone
to
provide
a
sense
of
what
specifically
needs
to
be
done,
because
I
think
this
might
be
a
great
prompt
for
someone
like
Jennifer.
A
Who
can
you
know
it
has
the
immediate
situational
knowledge
of
cube
ATM,
but
in
terms
of
like
someone
coming
to
this
and
trying
to
pick
it
up
and
know
what
to
do,
I,
don't
think,
there's
enough
here,
so
we
can
ping
Jennifer.
Is
there
someone
who
is
interested
in
cube?
Atm
wants
to
take
that
on
and
maybe
provide
a
little
bit
of
scope,
not
even
necessarily
do
the
work
just
provide
a
description
like
take
a
look
at
the
cube,
ATM
docks
and
get
a
sense
of
what
needs
to
happen
to
have
better
quality
docks.
There.
B
A
G
So
that
that
kind
of
should
fall
to
me
me
and
Andrew
and
Dominic,
and
we
keep
talking
about
it,
but
Andrew
and
I
both
end
up
just
never
having
time
to
do
it
so
I,
don't
know
whether
we
you
know
won't
scratch
it
or
give
it
away
or
just
leave
it
there
till,
like
you,
know,
til
the
Sun
shiny
day,
I
I.
Imagine
sometime
during
the
spring
will
I
mean
during
the
summer.
We
will
look.
You
find
some
time
to
get
to
that.
Okay,.
A
A
A
E
A
Awesome:
okay,
so
that
takes
us
through
the
issues
that
we
had
in
the
queue
and
that
leads
nicely
into
our
next
agenda
item
for
our
queue
to
review
and
q3
planning
meeting.
We
are
late
to
talk
about
this,
for
which
I
apologize
but
I
totally
don't
apologize
for
going
on
vacation
and
with
Kuk
on
Shanghai
next
week.
A
I'm
gonna
recommend
that
we
do
the
Q
to
review
q3
planning.
If
we
want
to
stick
to
the
let's
see
when
we
did
the
q1
review,
q2
planning,
we
did
that
on
a
Thursday
evening
and
that
seemed
to
work
out
pretty
well
for
folks.
So
if
we
looked
at
Thursday
July
25th
for
another
evening
slot
would
that
work
for
folks,
just
like.
A
See
shabby
thank
you
doing
the
Barney.
Does
that
time,
work
well
for
you,
and
my
guess
is
that
it's
probably
ends
up
being
like
like
unholy
hour
in
the
morning,
for
you.
A
B
H
A
A
A
F
F
Don't
know
if
you
saw
my
response
and
slack
I
had
some
family
stuff
that
pulled
me
away,
but
I'm
still
looking
into
to
something
like
that,
both
as
a
manual
step,
maybe
to
add
into
like
the
contributor
guide
to
say,
hey
if
you're
changing
lengths
maybe
run
this
tool.
You
know
we
decide
on
some
sort
of
open
source
tool
to
check
for
links
and
then
we
somehow
bake
that
into
an
automated
step.
At
some
point,
it'll.
B
Be
great
thanks
thanks,
EFT
and
I
recall
the
conversation
now
couldn't
remember
at
the
very
time,
but
there's
also
a
PR
that
landed
as
part
of
our
q1
or
q2
accomplishments.
I
forget,
which
one
and
I
won't
waste.
I've
rinsed
I'm
trying
to
pull
it
up,
but
we
reshift
it
or
shifted
a
lot
of
the
content
and
the
concepts
test
is
set
up
to
be
a
little
bit
more
readable.
B
A
lot
of
those
redirects
were
captured
in
a
weight
and
a
manner
that
would
just
say
if
you
have
a
broken
link,
it
redirect
you
a
working
page
with
how
many
links
removed
and
how
many
changes
happened
as
possible.
Some
of
that
fell
through
the
cracks
where
you
have
broken
links
now
out
there
that
don't
have
the
redirect
already
in
place.
B
Well,
I
lost
my
train
of
thought:
I
guess
what
I'm
getting
at
is
Google
right
now
is
producing
these
results
with
pages
that
come
up
as
404
dead
links
because
of
the
way
we've
changed
them.
If
they
don't
have
that
redirect
in
place
and
so
I
don't
know
beyond
the
work
you're
doing
Seth
to
address
this
issue,
we
might
need
to
consider
doing
some
sort
of
reindex
in
from
the
Google
search
engine
side
and
I
know.
We
got
plenty
of
smart
folks.
I
could
maybe
look
into
what
we
need
to
do
for
that.
F
Think
there's
actually
two
options.
I
was
looking
into
this
earlier.
I
mean
you,
as
in,
like
an
end
user,
can
just
submit
your
site
to
Google
for
re-indexing.
Are
they
providing
them
a
link
or
if
you
have
a
site
map,
you're
kind
of
at
their
whims?
They
say
anything
from
like
you
know,
two
days
to
a
week
or
two
to
re
index
your
site.
So
I
don't
know
if
there's
something
we
can
do
more
under
the
hood,
but
at
least
if
you
just
like
you,
know,
search
for
reindex
site.
B
Yeah,
thanks
for
that
and
I
think
I've
done
that
in
the
past,
for
some
of
the
smaller
sites
that
I've
worked
on,
so
something
to
consider
I
think
between
the
redirects
and
the
work
you're
doing
Seth
we're
gonna,
be
alright,
but
I've
seen
a
few
of
those
four
four
dead
links,
gonna
creep
up
and
I
think
we're
gonna
get
bit
by
Google
searches
and
old
documentation,
and
we
need
to
be
able
to
combat
that
a
little
bit
or
at
least
reduce
the
impact.
So
that's
all
I
really
want
to
bring
up.
B
It
sounds
like
that
they're
willing
to
take
that
over
yeah
yeah
and
it's
not
gonna,
be
one
solution.
We're
done.
It's
gonna
be
an
ongoing
efforts.
If
you're
talking
about
modifying
documentation
and
all
that,
so
that's
pretty
much
all
I
had
on
that
issue.
I
saw
that
exact,
editor
rap.
So
does
anyone
else
have
any
other
issues
they'd
like
to
talk
about.